Search for: "United States v. Pierce" Results 161 - 180 of 603
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Oct 2008, 10:05 am
Here's the abstract:This paper assesses the legal consequences of the framework established pursuant to Resolution 1267 (1999) and subsequent decisions by the United Nations Security Council imposing sanctions on individuals not necessarily associated with states or state actors. [read post]
1 Jun 2009, 7:12 am
Issue: Whether the antifraud provisions of the United States securities laws extend to transnational frauds where: (a) the foreign-based parent company conducted substantial business in the United States and (b)the claims arose from an accounting fraud perpetrated by American citizens at the parent company's Florida based subsidiary, and whether subject matter jurisdiction extends to transnational fraud-on-the-market claims. [read post]
14 May 2022, 9:31 am by Mavrick Law Firm
  The plaintiff-employee may attempt to prove discrimination through circumstantial evidence by satisfying the United States Supreme Court’s burden-shifting framework set forth it its decision in McDonnell Douglas v. [read post]
30 May 2019, 1:09 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
Comm’r,489 F.3d 1018, 1023 (9th Cir. 2007); United States v. [read post]
13 Mar 2009, 7:55 pm
  That legal challenge went all the way to the United States Supreme Court (the highest court in our country), which ruled in favor of Anna Nicole Smith in 2006. [read post]
10 Jun 2020, 10:56 am by OxFirst
Pierce, United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. [read post]
27 Dec 2017, 10:14 am by Beth Graham
After the Federal Circuit issued its opinion, Dow filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court of the United States. [read post]
In AMG, the Court rejected the FTC’s interpretation of Section 13(b) of the FTC Act, which states that the commission “may bring suit in a district court of the United States to enjoin” violations of the law that the FTC enforces. [read post]
30 Oct 2008, 10:03 am
The Court has already held that states have positive obligations to protect children from sexual abuse and corporal punishment from their parents (Z v United Kingdom (2002) and A v United Kingdom (1998), for example) and so the integrity of this public/private dividing line is not in issue, but whether it will be pierced from a gender perspective remains to be seen. [read post]
12 May 2015, 2:47 pm by John C. Manoog III
The Appellate Court’s Decision The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of the suit. [read post]
13 Nov 2020, 3:37 pm by colin@pavlacklawfirm.com
The concept stems from the Supreme Court of the United States’ ruling in American Pipe & Construction Co. v. [read post]
16 Jul 2012, 10:50 am by Julian Ku
  Imagine a court in the United States attempting to apply norms of U.S. law to pierce the corporate veil of a business incorporated under the law of a foreign country. [read post]